posted December 10, 2010 09:19 PM            

Will domestic partners receive benefits? Will gays and lesbians get their own military status? What will happen to housing? Will there be separate barracks and facilities? Will the change affect unit cohesion, especially on the battlefield? Will troops opposed to the repeal leave the military in droves?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/02/dadt.future.questions/index.html?hpt=Sbin

posted December 10, 2010 09:43 PM            

Unit cohesion: that is a bigger problem and I believe we will see many seasoned Soldiers leave the Military but after that upheavel it will level out and be more accepted IF

There are separate barracks. There is a reason why men are separated from women. That is the Military and I believe the same will hold true for gays and lesbians serving in any branch.

posted December 14, 2010 12:42 PM            

One of the things that has not been highlighted is the sexual harrassmant by higher ups (that are homosexual) towards lower enlisted Soldiers. We have had several cases in the Military that have been prosecuted but kept hush-hush because Soldiers were ashamed to come forward after being harrassed by a man. In one situation, a higher up got two Soldiers drunk and then when they passed out, performed sexual acts on them. They didn't want to come forward, but apparantly someone walked in during the commission and reported them all for homosexual acts. It was humiliating to those involved (I knew one of them from where I worked).

I think that may be one of the reasons that the Military branches want to wait until the wars are over, so that if DADT is repealed it will take place over a time of "no conflict" and not disrupt the troops (meaning, those that want to choose an early retirement can because of their beliefs and trust me, we are going to lose many troops over this).

I do believe though that it will all work out, it is just going to take time and rules have to be established before throwing people together.

posted December 14, 2010 01:41 PM            

Terrible.

posted December 16, 2010 05:26 PM            

In the last 30 years we have had 3 wars- the rest have been under NATO and did not involve the number of US troops that we had in the first gulf war or in the past two wars.

Lebanon (1982–1984) U.S. troops formed part of a multinational peacekeeping force to help the fragile Lebanese government maintain power.

Grenada (1983) President Reagan invaded the Caribbean nation of Grenada to overthrow its socialist government, which had close ties with Cuba.

Panama (1989) President George H.W. Bush invaded Panama and overthrew Panamanian dictator and drug-smuggler Manuel Noriega.

Gulf War (1991) Iraq invaded Kuwait, and a U.S.-led multinational force came to Kuwait's aid and expelled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's forces.

Somalia (1993) A U.S.-led multinational force attempted to restore order to war-torn Somalia so that food could be delivered and distributed within the famine-stricken country.

Bosnia (1994–1995) During the Bosnian civil war, which began shortly after the country declared independence in 1992, the U.S. launched air strikes on Bosnia to prevent “ethnic cleansing,” primarily by Serbs against Bosnians. The U.S. became a part of NATO's peacekeeping force in the region.

Kosovo (1999) Yugoslavia's province of Kosovo erupted into violence in the spring of 1999. A U.S.-led NATO force intervened with air strikes after Slobodan Milosevic's Serbian forces uprooted the population and embarked on the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo's ethnic Albanian population.

Afghanistan (2001– ) The Taliban government harbored Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda terrorist group, responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. After Afghanistan refused to turn over Bin Laden, the U.S. and UN coalition forces invaded. The Taliban government was ousted and many terrorist camps in Afghanistan were destroyed. U.S. and NATO troops remain in Afghanistan to support its fragile new government.

Iraq War (2003– ) The U.S. and Great Britain invaded and toppled the government of dictator Saddam Hussein. Troops remain in Iraq to combat the insurgency that formed after Hussein's defeat.

Read more: Military Conflicts in U.S. History — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0931831.html#ixzz18JcR51xj

___________________

At this time we have drawn down in Iraq (notice the uptick in violence?) and currently have more forces in Afghanistan with more training up in the US and overseas for 12 month deployments. 2009-2010 was the first year that some combat BDE's actually had more than 12 months before a new deployment (Bear the Leo was home 14 months before another 12 month deployment while the Regiment I worked for was home 12 months, went on a 15 month deployment and then left 18 months later for another deployment in Afghanistan- where they are currently a few months into a deployment).

Why is that significant? Why shove something down the troops throats without doing all the research? It is not as easy as saying "ok, new uniform change". There have to be rules and regulations that not only protect the current troops and deployment operations but also homosexuals that will be openly serving.

These protections (barracks, benefits, sexual harrassment guidelines, sex guidelines and so forth)have to be decided before you just start throwing people into the mix.

For example, the Military only provides benefits for married couples, we do not yet have a federal law acknowleding gay marriage. Will gay partners be notified since they are not considered a spouse? Will they have a say in where their partner is buried? Will they receive the death gratiuity? What happens when a gay Soldier cheats on their partner? Are they held to the same standards as a married Soldier (meaning, reduction in rank down to a dishonorable discharge) if gay marriage is not recognized by the Federal government / DoD?

What do we do when a gay couple is deployed together? Are they allowed separate barracks (some married couples are) or what if they engage in sexual acts down range or in their barracks room in country? If they are held accountable will it be perceived as breaking the rules even though a single heterosexual man that has a woman in their barracks room (if at a certain rank) can be punished?

Repealing the law is one thing however people aren't thinking about all the ramifications here and downrange.

posted December 16, 2010 07:12 PM            

Thanks so much for your unique perspective here.

I know myself, and I think probably Kat, but I can't speak for certain...I would never want them to just "poof" and everything is integrated, especially since people are actively in a conflict or war zone. I think that would have horrible consequences on the service people.

Also one other thing that might happen, is there might be a push for civilian recognization of gay marriage on the federal level due to that.

What I took Kat meaning, is sort of a "when will we not be in war" sort of sense.

Kat forgive me if I have misinterpreted your words.

I'm sure it's been much longer 10 years for you and Bear.

ADfly

posted December 17, 2010 02:04 PM            

I understood what Kat meant. I think that many people mean well but they don't think about the details and instead throw out flippant statements.

We're all good Abs. Deployments are a part of life and Bear, his family and I have gotten through it. He has two others brothers (1 Army and 1 Air Force) that have also had multiple deployments.

posted December 17, 2010 08:03 PM            

the statement was not a judgment on our military activity. just an observation that war or peace the gays are in the same position of not being able to speak out...

at the same time, of course i would love it if we were not at war. on this i insist on being allowed my FEELINGS which have nothing to do with my RESPECT for the actual men and women doing their jobs in the military. as i've mentioned before, one whole branch of my family are longterm military. three generations of them. these are people i love and respect but that does not make me appreciate the fact that they are being asked to risk their lives for reasons i disagree with.

posted December 18, 2010 03:03 PM            

I support gay rights, and I believe that it's about time gays get all equal rights.

I believe that gays should be allowed to be in the military openly.

------------------
No..I am not a Virgo.

posted December 20, 2010 12:25 PM            

I know your heart is in the right place. I also know that you respect the Military and care about all people. I'm not against gays in the Military. I am only against the improper implementation of DADT. However, I am not serving with the troops and I have to respect how they feel as well. Most don't have a problem with it from what I have seens. Others will turn in their retirement packets or not reenlist, which is their decision.